In a Poorly Produced Smear Piece, Al Jazeera English Throws an Embarrassing Fit of Jealousy at RT
http://maxkeiser.com/2012/01/21/aljazeera-english-throws-an-embarrassing-fit-of-jealousy-at-rt/
And notice that Luke Harding trots out the lazy propaganda that real Russian expert Steven Cohen brilliantly debunks in this recent interview on Democracy Now:
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/12/30/election_fraud_galvanizes_russian_opposition_communist
AMY GOODMAN: Professor Cohen, talk about what’s happening now in Russia. How significant are these mass protests?
STEPHEN COHEN: They’re very significant. But the problem is, is that the significance is obscured and skewed by the American media narrative of it all. It’s hard for me. I’m a professor by profession, and it startles me sometimes to realize that my students were born after the end of the Soviet Union, so I can’t assume anything. But the information that we’re getting from the print media, in particular, in this country, the narrative is simply wrong.
Here’s a paradox. These parliamentary elections on December 4th for the first time brought out middle-class protesters. We don’t know exactly how many, but tens of thousands in the center of Moscow. And yet—and please understand what I’m going to say—though these elections were not free and fair, they were the freest and fairest in 15 years. There’s a paradox there. What’s the paradox? Well, the historical narrative of democracy in Russia is wrong. The basic line in the Times, the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, where also mainstream television gets its stories, is that democratization began after the end of the Soviet Union under Yeltsin in the 1990s, and Putin has been steadily crushing it, and this is the last attempt to crush it completely. But that’s just plain historically untrue. The high point of democracy, in terms of both journalism, let’s say, and elections, was actually in ’89, ’90, ’91. And the reason that’s not admissible is it took place in Soviet Russia under Gorbachev. In the ’90s, under Yeltsin, began a process of what Russians call “de-democratization.” Now let’s flash forward—and Putin continued that. Now let’s flash forward to today.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And, of course, there was the—when Yeltsin actually attacked the parliament with the tanks. People forget that, right?
STEPHEN COHEN: Well, I haven’t forgotten it. Russians haven’t forgotten it. And it shames me that the Clinton administration, American academics, the media all supported that, quoting George Washington. Bear in mind that when Yeltsin destroyed an elected parliament in October 1993, it was the first time that had ever happened on the European continent since the Nazis burned the Reichstag in the 1930s. It was almost an unprecedented event. But it was a death blow, because you can’t have democracy without a parliament. You can have a democracy without a president, but you can’t have representative democracy without a parliament. And Russia has never had a stable parliament. It’s had lots of strong leaders.
snip
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
related
Al-Jazeera Chief Resigns After Wikileaks Reveals Close U.S. Ties To CIA, DIA, State Dept.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/20/wadah-khanfar-resigns-al-jazeera_n_971774.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
US praises AL Jazeera, once known as 'Al-Qaeda TV', then director quits after CIA connections exposed by Wikileaks
It wasn't all that long ago the Al Jazeera news network was considered, quote 'evil' by Washington. But the White House has certainly changed its tune, recently praising its ground breaking coverage. That's little surprise, say critics, after Wikileaks revelations exposed the director general of the Qatar based network of having links to the CIA, and promoting him to hurriedly quit. RT's Anissa Naouai takes up the story
#!
= new reply since forum marked as read
